Comics Curmudgeon Review
Mar. 24th, 2007 10:50 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alexxkayAmong the big pile of comics I got recently were the first three issues of Darwyn Cooke's new version of Will Eisner's The Spirit. They're... ok. The art style isn't aping Eisner's, but it is skilled and as willing to experiment as he was. The characters are all very much "on model". Well, except for Ebony; but if he was to be included at all, he *needed* an overhaul, desperately. The characterizations have shifted subtly in many ways, largely due to setting this in present day (which the Spirit always was back when Will was doing it). This required rebooting the continuity, but I don't mind that at all. Cooke clearly understands that part of the point of doing The Spirit is to have fun playing around with different narrative tones and storytelling techniques, and is doing so. Given everything that's being done right, why I am I having such a lukewarm reaction? Mostly, I think, because I have the same visceral response at the end of each issue:
"Yep, that's a story that Will Eisner might have told. But he'd have done it in 8 pages, not 20+"
The varied tone thing reminds me of the currently-in-preproduction movie of The Spirit, to be helmed by Frank Miller. In recent years, Miller has displayed an increasingly flat tone in his work. It's often *good* work, but it's all ultra-hardboiled noir. And it sounds like he's planning to make a Spirit movie along those lines as well. Not to say that The Spirit never did that type of story -- it certainly did. But that was only one color in a veritable rainbow palette of emotional tones Eisner used. To make a movie with just that tone and no other would be a failure of adaptation. I'd rather see someone like Quentin Tarantino handle it. "Pulp Fiction", with its anthology structure and its ability to leap between humor, horror, and human interest, is almost a model of how to make a Spirit movie that I'd approve of. In fact, the character that Tarantino himself played in that movie was a classic Eisner nebbish.
Speaking of not trusting Frank Miller, did you see the special issue #100 of Usagi Yojimbo? It was a break from the regular series continuity, with lots of other artists and writers doing a "roast" of Stan Sakai and his comic. One of these contributors was Frank Miller -- sort of. His 'contribution' was a single page of the shoddiest work I have ever seen from him. It looks like it was drawn in magic marker, with no prelimary pencils (or thought), in about two minutes. (I tried out lots of flowery metaphors to describe it, but decided to go with direct literal truth.) If I was Stan Sakai, I'd feel insulted. If I was a Frank Miller completist who bought this because of his name on the cover, I'd feel seriously ripped off.
I'm also starting to get annoyed by Jack of Fables. I know that part of the book's shtick is that Jack is narrating these stories, and that he's an arrogant prick. But it's starting to read to me like laziness and disrespect for the reader on the part of the authors. My recent large haul contained, again, three issues. The first one was the beginning of a two-part story... that was summarily abandoned in favor of a new story in the next issue, with merely a note from Jack/the authors saying, "Eh, we'll fix it in the trade." Excuse me? I know the business model is changing so that the monthlies aren't as important as they used to be, but I *am* still a paying customer, and I deserve better than that. Lots of other things they're doing in terms of storytelling probably seem clever to them, but I find both lazy and intrusive. And it doesn't help that there are no sympathetic characters, either. Jack is so obnoxiously egotistical that I don't feel any emotional investment in whether he 'wins' or not. I think it's time to drop this one.
To end on an up note, I just finished reading Volume V of "Buddha", Osamu Tezuka's massive biography of Siddhartha. Though calling it a 'biography' gives the wrong impression in many ways. This is far more myth than history to begin with, and Tezuka doesn't hesitate to add his own embroideries to the story. And the scope is incredibly broad, with lots of pages spent on characters who are important to Buddha's life is one way or another. Heck, Buddha isn't even *born* until the end of the first volume, IIRC. In this volume, he doesn't appear until about halfway through, because the narrative is focusing on other characters. And *what* a narrative! This is Tezuka at the very top of his form. The story has buddhist philosophy, sure, but it also has warfare, floods, sacrifice, arena duels, talking animals, palace intrigue, a giant, true love, and a killer elephant -- and that's just in *this* volume! The series as a whole gets my highest recommendation.
"Yep, that's a story that Will Eisner might have told. But he'd have done it in 8 pages, not 20+"
The varied tone thing reminds me of the currently-in-preproduction movie of The Spirit, to be helmed by Frank Miller. In recent years, Miller has displayed an increasingly flat tone in his work. It's often *good* work, but it's all ultra-hardboiled noir. And it sounds like he's planning to make a Spirit movie along those lines as well. Not to say that The Spirit never did that type of story -- it certainly did. But that was only one color in a veritable rainbow palette of emotional tones Eisner used. To make a movie with just that tone and no other would be a failure of adaptation. I'd rather see someone like Quentin Tarantino handle it. "Pulp Fiction", with its anthology structure and its ability to leap between humor, horror, and human interest, is almost a model of how to make a Spirit movie that I'd approve of. In fact, the character that Tarantino himself played in that movie was a classic Eisner nebbish.
Speaking of not trusting Frank Miller, did you see the special issue #100 of Usagi Yojimbo? It was a break from the regular series continuity, with lots of other artists and writers doing a "roast" of Stan Sakai and his comic. One of these contributors was Frank Miller -- sort of. His 'contribution' was a single page of the shoddiest work I have ever seen from him. It looks like it was drawn in magic marker, with no prelimary pencils (or thought), in about two minutes. (I tried out lots of flowery metaphors to describe it, but decided to go with direct literal truth.) If I was Stan Sakai, I'd feel insulted. If I was a Frank Miller completist who bought this because of his name on the cover, I'd feel seriously ripped off.
I'm also starting to get annoyed by Jack of Fables. I know that part of the book's shtick is that Jack is narrating these stories, and that he's an arrogant prick. But it's starting to read to me like laziness and disrespect for the reader on the part of the authors. My recent large haul contained, again, three issues. The first one was the beginning of a two-part story... that was summarily abandoned in favor of a new story in the next issue, with merely a note from Jack/the authors saying, "Eh, we'll fix it in the trade." Excuse me? I know the business model is changing so that the monthlies aren't as important as they used to be, but I *am* still a paying customer, and I deserve better than that. Lots of other things they're doing in terms of storytelling probably seem clever to them, but I find both lazy and intrusive. And it doesn't help that there are no sympathetic characters, either. Jack is so obnoxiously egotistical that I don't feel any emotional investment in whether he 'wins' or not. I think it's time to drop this one.
To end on an up note, I just finished reading Volume V of "Buddha", Osamu Tezuka's massive biography of Siddhartha. Though calling it a 'biography' gives the wrong impression in many ways. This is far more myth than history to begin with, and Tezuka doesn't hesitate to add his own embroideries to the story. And the scope is incredibly broad, with lots of pages spent on characters who are important to Buddha's life is one way or another. Heck, Buddha isn't even *born* until the end of the first volume, IIRC. In this volume, he doesn't appear until about halfway through, because the narrative is focusing on other characters. And *what* a narrative! This is Tezuka at the very top of his form. The story has buddhist philosophy, sure, but it also has warfare, floods, sacrifice, arena duels, talking animals, palace intrigue, a giant, true love, and a killer elephant -- and that's just in *this* volume! The series as a whole gets my highest recommendation.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-24 04:20 pm (UTC)Drop it if you like, but that comment wasn't meant to insult the reader.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-29 05:13 pm (UTC)That's really the essence of the problem with almost anyone trying to do the Spirit. Eisner was one of the half-dozen best writers ever in comics, but his true mastery was the 8-page story. I don't think I know anyone else *capable* of so consistently fitting a complete story -- with detailed plots, rich characters and good dialog -- into 8 pages.
I kind of think of him as the anti-Sim. I like both a lot (well, until Sim went insane), but they work at opposite size scales.
Miller working on the Spirit: ick. I suspect I'll just have to ignore that one, unless Frank breaks with his current form. While I'm still moderately fond of his stuff, I agree that he's gotten fairly one-dimensional.
Jack of Fables: I'm still enjoying it, more or less as I did from the beginning. That is, I don't think it has anywhere near the depth of the main series, but I still find it consistently fun, in a fluffier way.
Buddha: only in the middle of Volume 3 right now, but I agree with the review. Fascinating series, although it does little to scratch my intellectual itch about the subject -- this really is all about the mythology, with only a pretty shallow look at the philosophy...
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-29 06:57 pm (UTC)Well, how many people try? Cooke certainly hasn't, but I don't know if that's a personal choice or an editorial one.
Certainly Alan Moore has the chops (as demonstrated in his entries for the Spirit: New Adventures things of a while back). Of course, he cut his teeth working for years on 8-page stories in the UK (Swamp Thing was his first work at longer lengths). I suspect there are lots of other 2000 A.D./Warrior alumni who are comfortable working at that length, though probably none in Moore's skill class.
For that matter, I think Dave Sim is quite capable of doing 8-pagers. He did a number of short pieces scattered around the one monster-sized one over the years, and they all seemed to work well. Sim is enough of a fan of formal constraints and experimentation that I'm sure he'd be capable of rising to the challenge. I just can't think of any way anyone could possibly *motivate* him to do so, given his beliefs.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-30 01:34 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-30 03:16 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-30 12:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-02 02:49 pm (UTC)On another note, I've just been reading through Fables in trade form (completed Vol 8 / issue 50 & 1001 Nights of Snowfall). Are the Jack of Fables trades worth picking up or would I be better off just borrowing them from you?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-04-03 12:03 am (UTC)